Compare Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Cisco Firepower NGFW

Check Point Virtual Systems is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 4 reviews while Cisco Firepower NGFW which is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 15 reviews. Check Point Virtual Systems is rated 8.6, while Cisco Firepower NGFW is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Check Point Virtual Systems writes "Multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Firepower NGFW writes "Enables us to monitor and confirm all of the traffic coming in or going out of our network". Check Point Virtual Systems is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA NGFW and pfSense, whereas Cisco Firepower NGFW is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA NGFW and Palo Alto Networks WildFire. See our Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Cisco Firepower NGFW report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Cisco Firepower NGFW and other solutions. Updated: July 2019.
359,556 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides.Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable.We moved from a legacy firewall to the ASA with FirePOWER, increasing our Internet Edge defense dramatically.Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside.Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.The feature that I found most valuable is the overall stability of the product.The stability of Cisco ASA is excellent compared to other products on the market. Because of our customer experience as an integrator company, our clients never report any performance problems. We have a good performance reputation with Cisco ASA.I would say the Firepower module is most valuable. I'm trying more to transition to this kind firewall. I had to study a little on Palo Alto Networks equipment. There is a lot I have to learn about the difference.

Read more »

It's a high-performance device. The network performance is also really good. We check how much time it takes for the servers. Our network performance has increased since using this solution.The most valuable feature is the monitoring. We can easily monitor what kind of stuff comes over to our network and we can then check the dashboard and work accordingly.We consolidated from three management consoles and three clusters to only one, which is a big improvement.Its blades and VSLS (Virtual System Load Sharing) work fine.Monitoring using SmartConsole and all its features is extremely easy, and I find SmartEvent an excellent monitoring tool for spotting threats and user behaviour.The multiple virtual firewalls on one box are extremely useful and the interconnection with virtual switches is simple and easy to understand.

Read more »

They wanted to leverage something which is equivalent that can give them the next gen features like application awareness and intrusion protection. So that is a major reason they were looking forward to this. The original ASA firewall did not have these features. This was the major reason the customer moved on to Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD). Now they can go ahead and leverage those functionalities.Cisco Firepower NGFW is really easy to use right now to determine when my file requires a shift from primary to secondary status, and it can be done with automation. Earlier we used to do this with patching.An eight because it's a good security solution. It's more mature than its competitors.Because of the deeper inspection it provides we have better security and sections that allow users broader access.We chose Cisco because it had the full package that we were looking for.Stability is perfect. I haven't had any problems.The architecture of FTD is great because it has an in-depth coverage and because it uses the AVC, (Application, Visibility, and Control) and also rate limits. Also, the architecture of fast paths is great.The most valuable features are the IPsec VPN and web filtering.

Read more »

Cons
There was an error in the configuration, related to our uplink switches, that caused us to contact technical support, and it took a very long time to resolve the issue.With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good.The product would be improved if the GUI could be brought into the 21st Century.Cisco should improve its user interface design. There is a deep learning curve to the product if you are a newcomer.There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.One of my main concerns, an area that could use improvement is in adjusting the need to buy a license to enable features.Usually, the customers are satisfied, but I am going to recommend that all clients upgrade to FirePOWER management. I want Cisco to improve the feature called anti-spam. We use a Cisco only email solution, that's why we need the anti-spam on email facility.The installation and integration of Cisco ASA with FirePOWER can be improved. The management with Fortigate is easier than Cisco ASA on FirePOWER. The management side of Cisco ASA can be improved so it can be more easily configured and used.

Read more »

The initial setup is difficult. It took me three tries to get it right. The setup took two or three hours.The initial setup was a bit complex.Having a web UI in the VSX (or something similar) would be nice.We have Microsoft CASB cloud app security and it's one of the least compatible firewalls. They really need to look at this, as both Check Point and Microsoft are major players. Why aren't they compatible? If we had Palo Alto then we wouldn't have this problem.

Read more »

I was just trying to learn how this product actually operates and one thing that I see from internal processing is it does fire-walling and then sends it to the IPS model and any other model that needs to be performed. For example, content checking or filtering will be done in a field processing manner. That is something that causes delays in the network, from a security perspective. That is something that can be improved upon. Palo Alto already has implemented this as a pilot passed processing. So they put the same stream of data across multiple modules at the same time and see if it is giving a positive result by using an XR function. So, something similar can be done in the Cisco Firepower. Instead of single processing or in a sequential manner, they can do something similar to pile processing. Internal function that is something that they can improve upon.One feature lacking is superior anti-virus protection, which must be added.The security features in the URL category need more improvement.Cisco should redo their website so it's actually usable in a faster way.The stability and the product features have to really be worked on.I would like for them to develop better integration with other security platforms.The license system is also good but it's not very impressive. It's a very regular licensing system. They call it a smart license which means that your device will connect to the internet. This is a little bit of a headache for some customers. It doesn't make the customer happy because most of the customers prefer not to connect their firewall or system to the internet.It seems very clunky and slow. I would like to be able to tune it to be a more efficient product.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs.We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement.The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market.Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions.Pricing is high, but it is essentially a corporate decision.The cost is a bit high compared to other solutions in the market.Cisco recently has become very expensive.The cost is a bit higher than other competitive solutions on the market.

Read more »

Information Not Available
We normally license on a yearly basis. The hardware procurement cost should be considered. If you're virtual maybe that cost is eradicated and just the licensing cost is applied. If you have hardware the cost must be covered by you. All the shipping charges will be paid by you also. I don't thing there are any other hidden charges though.The Cisco licensing agreement in Bangladesh is different than the one in India and in Dubai. It is not a problem, but if you want to subscribe to the yearly subscription, the original cost is really high. Also, if you go for an anti-virus, you pay for an additional yearly subscription.It's more expensive than Fortinet and Juniper. The price is high compared to other vendors. In general, for the license, it's not that expensive.Based on the services that you will get, especially the AMP license, the price is very reasonable.We pay a lot of money for it.It is a great solution for medium or big enterprises, not so much for small businesses, mainly due to the financial costs.Cisco Firepower is a great solution, but it is expensive compared to others that can provide similar benefits for much less.In terms of scalability, it is really expensive. It is scalable, but when it comes to pricing, the upgrading is a bit high.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
359,556 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Also Known As
Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASACheck Point VSXCisco Firepower Next-Generation Firewall, FirePOWER
Learn
Cisco
Check Point
Cisco
Overview

Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.

Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.

Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.

VSX (Virtual System Extension) is a security and VPN solution for large-scale environments based on the proven security of Check Point Security Gateway. VSX provides comprehensive protection for multiple networks or VLANs within complex infrastructures. It securely connects them to shared resources such as the Internet and/or a DMZ, and allows them to safely interact with each other.

The Cisco Firepower Next Generation Firewall (NGFW) prevents breaches, and can quickly detect and mitigate stealthy attacks using deep visibility and the most advanced security capabilities of any firewall available today - all while maintaining optimal network performance and uptime. With Cisco NGFW you can automate operations to save time, reduce complexity, and work smarter.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Check Point Virtual Systems
Learn more about Cisco Firepower NGFW
Sample Customers
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.Bentley Systems, Almaviva TSF S.p.A, Yankuang Group, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.Rackspace, The French Laundry, Downer Group, Lewisville School District, Shawnee Mission School District, Lower Austria Firefighters Administration, Oxford Hospital, SugarCreek, Westfield
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm19%
Manufacturing Company12%
Comms Service Provider10%
University7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm14%
Manufacturing Company11%
Transportation Company8%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Manufacturing Company29%
Financial Services Firm29%
Comms Service Provider29%
Transportation Company14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm16%
Transportation Company14%
Healthcare Company14%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business38%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise36%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business42%
Midsize Enterprise25%
Large Enterprise33%
REVIEWERS
Small Business60%
Large Enterprise40%
REVIEWERS
Small Business53%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise24%
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Virtual Systems vs. Cisco Firepower NGFW and other solutions. Updated: July 2019.
359,556 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Sign Up with Email